I don't know how research can still produce these broad and unscientific statements. So what kind of fats were the diets? Monounsat? Polyunsat? Omeg3? Omeg6? Sat fat? Sat fat from commerical grain fed meats? Sat fat from dairy? too many variables as usual.

If you left it up to the general public to eat less fat, most of theirs is the wrong kind anyways!

I'd guess to say that if the control group ate all fat from non-inflammatory and toxic source then they might have actually seen an improvement. If you increase inflammation and toxic load with the wrong fats, that just makes all things worse in the body.

i think the no sig difference between overall diet vs control groups, pretty much means the low fat diet isnt the final answer. seems likely to be more of a hormonal issue, since sig diffences only found when broke apart by hormone pos/neg groups.

and i agree with mike about food sources. so for the hormone receptor neg - what about a possible decrease in sugar intake that corresponded with fat intake? i.e. fruits/veggies instead of donuts?